On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think this hurts Clang layering and maintainability. At the moment, > *within Clang*, it's very useful to have most of the CodeGen headers in > lib/CodeGen rather than within include/clang/CodeGen, since that makes > obvious and enforces the layering between CodeGen's private headers and the > rest of Clang. > > => I'm opposed to this change. The CodeGen API is even more implementation > details than the AST and Sema API. If you want to include clang's internal > implementation details, go ahead, but I don't think we should break our own > layering to support this. > Do we (or did we) have actual layering problems where parts of clang think they can call into CodeGen? Today the only include into clang/Codegen comes from FrontendTool.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
